[RRG] Small comment on draft-jen-apt-00.txt

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

I'm concerned that the proposed mechanism (as described
in section 5) completely deprives senders of the ability
to choose which of a destinations locators to use, in
accordance with their local policy (whatever it may be).
I don't think this is acceptable as it alllows receivers
or the operators of default APT mappers to constrain senders'
choice of ISP. That settles a business "tussle" in advance,
and I don't think technology should do that.

I'm also a bit concerned (section 5.1) that failover will be
delayed. In today's model, a sender can try a second address
after a sender-decided timeout on the first one. In APT, it
looks as if the sender will have to depend on a timeout in
the default mapper. But the only real test of reachability
is end to end.

And the standard question: how will this work with SCTP?

    Brian

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg